|
|
SkrentyzMienty
Famous Hero
|
posted March 28, 2011 07:34 PM |
|
|
|
The fact that all humans invented religion is obvious and logical, because they are the same species and share the same intellectual limits and weaknesses. So it is rather an argument that could be used by the ones opposing religion rather than the people who gave it while failing to see the simple explanation.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 28, 2011 08:22 PM |
|
|
It doesn't matter. Even a crutch is somewhat necessary, otherwise people would fall.
It would be a grave error to try and classify religion as something of a useless folly. Things who are there on a general level tend to have a function, otherwise they would disappear.
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted March 28, 2011 08:23 PM |
|
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted March 29, 2011 07:25 PM |
|
|
Quote:
If you believe in evolution it IS grounded, since the humans we know have ALL developed a religion. Happenstance?
If it WAS happenstance you'd think that there should have been peoples without any religion.
The thing is most people are too rational to be atheists. They recognize that it is impossible that all of existence popped into being from a steady state of absolute nothing, causeless.
Oh, you are saying divinely caused evolution is impossible? How so?
Quote:
However, with every known people that has left "prints" worshipping gods or having kind of an idea of a "cosmic order", an idea of the place of humans within it, you might get the idea that "civilization" and religion somehow go hand in hand.
They do go hand in hand. Atheism can't be the basis of a fair and just society, as history has proven. Civilized peoples are theists.
Quote:
From the Bible we know that in ancient times a war between two peoples also was a war of their respective gods, kind of a contest of which one was stronger and therefore "truer". It might just be that peoples - even if there were any without any religion, would grasp for one, seeing other peoples with a religion being "successful". Even peoples like the Vikings or the Huns had a religion.
If you mean that the God of the Bible proved that he is the only God, yes, he certainly did.
____________
Revelation
|
|
gnomes2169
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Duke of the Glade
|
|
posted March 30, 2011 12:06 AM |
|
|
Elodin, please note that, before you make another post refuting those that claim the bible isn't completely and totally right, they aren't talking about that any more. If it is beyond you to grasp that, then by all means, be silent.
This thread just got back to its original purpose, don't de-rail that again.
Back to the thread. I think that JJ has a very good point. Every civilization has or had a central religion. It is really one of the greatest similarities between all the civilizations throughout the world, if not the greatest similarity. It doesn't matter if the religion is logical or not, humans made them. What would have happened if humans hadn't?
____________
Yeah in the 18th century, two inventions suggested a method of measurement. One won and the other stayed in America.
-Ghost destroying Fred
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted March 30, 2011 07:36 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 19:36, 30 Mar 2011.
|
Quote:
Back to the thread. I think that JJ has a very good point. Every civilization has or had a central religion. It is really one of the greatest similarities between all the civilizations throughout the world, if not the greatest similarity. It doesn't matter if the religion is logical or not, humans made them. What would have happened if humans hadn't?
Of course every nation has had religions because almost everyone who has ever lived has been intelligent enough to recognize that a deity exists. People gather together and worship with others who have a similar view of that Deity as they do.
Yes, humans "made" most religions. The exceptions being Judaism and Christianity. 
I already address what would have happened if there were no religions. All you have to do is look at every nation that has ever been officially atheist. Not a pretty picture.
____________
Revelation
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 30, 2011 08:11 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Of course every nation has had religions because almost everyone who has ever lived has been intelligent enough to recognize that a deity exists. People gather together and worship with others who have a similar view of that Deity as they do.
Yes, humans "made" most religions. The exceptions being Judaism and Christianity.
I already address what would have happened if there were no religions. All you have to do is look at every nation that has ever been officially atheist. Not a pretty picture.
What is EXTREMELY wrong with this statement (as opposed to simply wrong)?
Answer: two things.
1) Didn't this poster until now vehemently declare in just about every single of his posts that atheism was a religion? "The religion of atheism"... and now look at the last paragraph.
2) A serious case of offense: "almost everyone who has ever lived has been intelligent enough to recognize that a deity exists." Am I just a little bit touchy here or is this poster really saying that everyone who isn't recognizing the existance of a deity falls below a certain - rather low - level of intelligence?
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted March 30, 2011 08:30 PM |
|
|
Let's put it this way:
"Almost all people so far have been too stupid to realise deities don't exist."
Now it seems as I've made Skrenty intelligent, OH SNAP!
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted March 30, 2011 09:07 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 21:09, 30 Mar 2011.
|
Quote:
What is EXTREMELY wrong with this statement (as opposed to simply wrong)?
Answer: two things.
1) Didn't this poster until now vehemently declare in just about every single of his posts that atheism was a religion? "The religion of atheism"... and now look at the last paragraph.
It is obvious that was speaking of theistic religions when I wrote "religion." Otherwise a paradox would occur and the question being asked would be "What would have happened if religion both did not and did exist?
Quote:
2) A serious case of offense: "almost everyone who has ever lived has been intelligent enough to recognize that a deity exists." Am I just a little bit touchy here or is this poster really saying that everyone who isn't recognizing the existance of a deity falls below a certain - rather low - level of intelligence?
You have stated many times that religious people are delusional, ect and yet you find offense at my statement that it is intelligent to be a theist? Indeed, in this very thread you have slurred theists and said religion is only a "common illusion" and "crutch" of religious people. And you have a particular zeal for attacking Christianity. Atheists often have double standards though.
However, I made a positive comment on the intelligence of theists while you outright insulted theists.
|
|
gnomes2169
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Duke of the Glade
|
|
posted March 30, 2011 09:25 PM |
|
|
But see here Elodin, we aren't asking if it is smart to have a religion (I can make a thread for you if you want to argue that...), the question is What would happen if there was no religion, period. Yes, this does include the "Technical" religions. (Athiesm, Budhism, Confucanism, etc.)
____________
Yeah in the 18th century, two inventions suggested a method of measurement. One won and the other stayed in America.
-Ghost destroying Fred
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 30, 2011 10:22 PM |
|
|
All paradoxes here ONLY result from the fact that "some" define Atheism as a (technical) religion.
In general, when paradoxes occur the reason is ill definitions.
Atheism is NO religion. The reasomn is, that atheism doesn't say anything about a believe - it means only that they doubt certain aspects of the belief of others. That doesn't mean you can't believe in SOMETHING (else).
See it this way: would A-Jahwehism be a religion? No. it just says you don't believe in the god of Jews, Christians and Muslims.
Or take nationality: Is Non-European a nationality? Nah.
So, for the last time: Atheism is no religion, not technically not otherwise.
|
|
Vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted March 31, 2011 01:06 AM |
|
Edited by Vlaad at 01:13, 31 Mar 2011.
|
|
Gnomes, I'd suggest looking up Joseph Campbell's works. He answered some of the questions raised here, namely the origin and function of mythology and religion in society. Start by checking this wiki entry and see if there's a title that would interest you. There's even a series of lectures called "Mythos" available in DVD format.
|
|
gnomes2169
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Duke of the Glade
|
|
posted March 31, 2011 04:15 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Gnomes, I'd suggest looking up Joseph Campbell's works. He answered some of the questions raised here, namely the origin and function of mythology and religion in society. Start by checking this wiki entry and see if there's a title that would interest you. There's even a series of lectures called "Mythos" available in DVD format.
Thanks Vlaad, I'll look into that. 
But the reason I asked here is, I want to know what you guys thought of this subject. I can see now that religion was a can of rotten meat with worms growing in it that I should have just left alone. But since we seem to finally wrapping that up, I guess I could ask a new question.
What would have happened if...
Now illegal drugs had never existed?
____________
Yeah in the 18th century, two inventions suggested a method of measurement. One won and the other stayed in America.
-Ghost destroying Fred
|
|
Aculias
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Pretty Boy Angel Sacraficer
|
|
posted March 31, 2011 05:15 AM |
|
|
What would of happened if MVass had more then 2 parties in his Life?
What would of happened if MVass actually can have a conversation with a lady & not get bored?
What would of happened if MVass was not a genius Academically?
What would of happened if MVass actually had sex 7 not read about it? 
____________
Dreaming of a Better World
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted March 31, 2011 10:00 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Gnomes, I'd suggest looking up Joseph Campbell's works.
Indeed, Campbell is an excellent reading. Of course one should not agree with what he says without some doubt here and there but all in all the man knows what he's talking about.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted April 01, 2011 06:45 AM |
|
|
Quote:
All paradoxes here ONLY result from the fact that "some" define Atheism as a (technical) religion.
In general, when paradoxes occur the reason is ill definitions.
Atheism is NO religion. The reasomn is, that atheism doesn't say anything about a believe - it means only that they doubt certain aspects of the belief of others. That doesn't mean you can't believe in SOMETHING (else).
See it this way: would A-Jahwehism be a religion? No. it just says you don't believe in the god of Jews, Christians and Muslims.
Or take nationality: Is Non-European a nationality? Nah.
So, for the last time: Atheism is no religion, not technically not otherwise.
Ah, the US courts would disagree with you as both lower courts and the Supreme Court ruled atheism to be a religion.
In particular the anti-theist denomination of atheism is certainly very religious. They don't say, "I believe no god exists" (soft atheism.) Instead they dogmaticly insist "[I know]No god exists." That is what is known as "hard atheism" in philosophical terms. Of course there is not the slightest bit of evidence to back up their claim. It is a dogma that they take by faith.
Not only do they have faith in things they can't prove (like God does not exist, spirits don't exist, nothing beyond the material eixsts, ect) but they are highly evangelical and shout their dogma from the rooftops. Also, many anti-theists even go so far as to try to impose their own viewpoints on the rest of society and seek to deny others freedom to freely practice their religion. For examle, denying people the right to wear religious symbols, religious clothing, or to put up religous symbols in their own yard or even to read a religious text during free time in public schools. Some anti-theists even want to go so far as to ban parents from teaching children their religion.
Basicly it is pretty much impossible for relgion to not exist. Firstly because it is impossible that the universe created itself out of a steady state of absolute nothing and most people recognize that fact. Secondly, saying "I believe" as in "I believe no god exists" is a statement of faith about the supernatural, which makes atheism a religion.
____________
Revelation
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 01, 2011 06:49 AM |
|
|
Quote:
What would of happened if MVass actually can have a conversation with a lady & not get bored?
Believe it or not, I talk to girls every day and I don't get bored.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 01, 2011 07:32 AM |
|
|
This has been discussed to death already, but just as a reminder:
a) the supreme court ruling of the US is a technical one; while the constitution says that you must not have any disadvantages because of your religion, it did NOT say until now that you must not have any disadvantages because you have NO religion - that has been corrected, and rightly so.
b) Not believing something that others belief, does not qualify for an own belief. Phrasing it "positive" doesn't help:
1) "I believe no god or gods exist." This is just an (unsound) rephrasing of the actual statement:
2) "I do not believe, any god or gods exist. Instead I believe in ... (for example collective unconsciousness)."
3) Another case is: "I have no idea what to believe in, but I certainly do not believe in any of the gods the world religions suggest(ed)."
This does not qualify as a belief or religion either - it's just a rejection of the known alternatives, since they do not "appeal". Finding all existing religions and all their gods contradictory, inconsistent, and unconvincing or even sickening, doesn't found a new religion.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted April 01, 2011 03:49 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 16:11, 01 Apr 2011.
|
Quote:
This has been discussed to death already, but just as a reminder:
a) the supreme court ruling of the US is a technical one; while the constitution says that you must not have any disadvantages because of your religion, it did NOT say until now that you must not have any disadvantages because you have NO religion - that has been corrected, and rightly so.
Sorry, but you have things all wrong when it comes to the rulings of the court; there is nothing "technical" about the rulings of the courts. They stated directly that atheism is a religion.
In the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, the court described "secular humanism" as a religion.
Quote:
We repeat and again reaffirm that neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person "to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion." Neither can constitutionally pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as against non-believers, and neither can aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs.
Quote:
Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism and others.
7th Court
An atheist appealed for the court to recognize atheism as a religion and it did.
Quote:
"Atheism is [the inmate's] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being,"
Quote:
b) Not believing something that others belief, does not qualify for an own belief. Phrasing it "positive" doesn't help:
1) "I believe no god or gods exist." This is just an (unsound) rephrasing of the actual statement:
2) "I do not believe, any god or gods exist. Instead I believe in ... (for example collective unconsciousness)."
3) Another case is: "I have no idea what to believe in, but I certainly do not believe in any of the gods the world religions suggest(ed)."
This does not qualify as a belief or religion either - it's just a rejection of the known alternatives, since they do not "appeal". Finding all existing religions and all their gods contradictory, inconsistent, and unconvincing or even sickening, doesn't found a new religion.
Religion at its root is belief. A theological position can be "there is a god," "there isn't a god," "no one can know if there is a god or not," or "it doesn't matter if there is a god." Any of the above can be the basis of a religion.
Saying "there is no god" is a statement of faith. Atheism is a religion, as the courts correctly ruled.
Oh, your #3 is an agnostic, not an atheist. A "soft agnostic" is one who says "I don't know if there is a god but it is possible that someone may know if there is a god." A "hard agnostic" says, "I don't know if there is a god and it is impossible for anyone else to know too." "Hard agnosticism" is certainly a religion because it makes a statement of faith.
____________
Revelation
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 01, 2011 04:27 PM |
|
|
Maybe, just maybe, Elodin, you should just READ the ruling of the court; you would than see, that your interpretation is wrong.
It's treated as an equivalent of a religion for the purpose of the first amendment only, which is explicitely and multiply said. It's high time you get a grip on this.
Second, for the rest you are sinply raping logic and language. Rejecting a belief - disbelieving it - doesn't constituate a religion, because disbelieving something you need faith for doesn't need any faith itself.
With your definitions, disbelieving in Scientology would constitute a new religion.
|
|
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
